Surfnshannon Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 I know....I know... I didn't go when it was in the theater... so I rented it today and these are my thoughts on it...maybe you guys can clarify some stuff up etc I was DISSAPOINTED. I heard how great it was and awwwwesome reviews and EVERYONE told me to see and so I sat down to watch it and....WTF??? It had its moments with the action scenes..but some of the stuff was sooo drawn out! Usually I cry when charectors die in the movie (I know I'm a girl...and I'm pregnant so I can cry!) and when Gandolph died...I was like....okay.... the guys were carring around the hobbit guys like they were little kids...corny kind of... Don't flame me. I was mad! I will watch the second one in hopes that now the premise of the story (all...2 hours and something) was told...we can get on with it. Maybe I would have more respect for it if I read the book. I really admire directors when they keep the movie almost exactly like the original story. I hear LOTR did that and for that I can understand why so many liked it. You know what it felt like...If I was to have NEVER seen a Star Wars Film EVER...never read about it...never read any spoilers...etc and EVERYONE TOLD ME HOW GREAT it was...and then I watched the Phantom Menace. Kinda of like..whats all the damn hype about?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havoc Stryphe Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 Run while you still can, before Rhett sees this! Actually, I can see why you feel the way you do. But you must understand. These movies are, as you stated, very true and accurate to the novels. Which were written over sixty years ago. The Story is very in depth, with a lot of Character development, on both a small level and of course on an large epic level. It was written during a time that descriptive writing was very prominent. So the Novels themselves are very long and detailed. Therein lies your problem. In order that the director, Peter Jackson, could retell the story on the silver screen without "butchering" or "watering it down" so that the story moved faster to appeal to many average moviegoers, He would then completely anger and frustrate the Tolkien fans and dishonor J.R.R Tolkien's vision and story. The movie needed to be like it is if it was ever going to pull it off. Just think, they cut out over 4 hours of additional footage to move it along just a little faster But don't worry, there is still hope for you! Go out and read the novels and you will understand the hype then. Because the real hype is this: Until now, the fantasy realm of LotR has remained only in our minds. Visual Technology and special effects have finally made it possible to realize Tolkien's dream visually and on the big screen. If you had only the books, which are masterfully written and very descriptive, and your imagination to live out these sequences and then someone said it's now going to be a movie, you would instantly be so excited to see these images and to hear the characters. To see the Balrog. To see Sauron. To hear Gandolf's commanding voice and to see his presence! To see a dwarves and elves and Hobbits! To actually see and hear teh creature Gollem! After years of only mental images to play with, it would make you excited too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jedi Kyp Durron Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 I watched the Hobbit cartoon thing and then went on to read the book. It was word for word the exact same as the cartoon. The Fellowship of the Ring was pretty much true to the Movie but left alot of stuff out and changed some details like how this person joined them and all that. You should read the book to really enjoy the movie. The special effects and costuming brought Tolkein world to life in an incredible way. The acting of Saruman and Gandolf stood out the most. Saruman was played by Christopher Lee (I thik that's his name) who also played Count Dooku in Star Wars Attack of the Clones Can't wait till The Two Towers comes out it looks like it will be stunning. Did they cut out 4 hours? Thats going to be a heck of a DVD, it will take half a day to watch the whole movie with the deleted sceens. Oh well. I wonder if they'll make a Hobbit. That book was good too. Really easy to understand and follow along with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Nine Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 The movie was very good. It was very well acted and planned out. I can attest to all this, as I've seen it in theaters eight separate times. And Sir Ian McKellen was robbed at the Oscars. Robbed, I say! I did have a few qualms with the movie too. Sauron looks a bit like some villian out of Power Rangers. And as much as I love Christopher Lee's portrayal of Saruman, we didn't need to see so much of him and his creation of the orcs. One scene would hav sufficed. Don't worry. The next installment has a whole bunch more action than FOTR. Indeed, I think that FOTR is the tamest of the three novels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tie Guy Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 I know how you feel, STTCT. I ddin't think it was some incredible end-all movie either. It was pretty good though, but i too think that it was way too drawn out. I think every single SW film was better than LOTR, even TPM. And i never needed a book as an exuse to like them, either. I've never read the books either. Actually, i started to but i just had to stop because they were so incredibly boring. As for accuracy, the part of the book i did read was about as different from the movie as it can be, except for the characters and bilbo's birthday, and frodo getting the ring and really basic stuff like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadDoofer Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 I just got the DVD yesterday and I am watching it now. I liked the movie a lot, and I read the books, but I still agree with STTCT. It drags somewhat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryllith Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 I'm torn between whether I should rent the DVD and watch it at home or if I should go to the theatre and watch it there. Kryllith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boba Rhett Posted August 8, 2002 Share Posted August 8, 2002 *clenches hands in fists of rage* I'll just chalk this up to you being pregnant. *throws copies of THe Hobbit and LotR at STTCT and runs out of the room muffling his screams with his hands* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zygomaticus Posted August 8, 2002 Share Posted August 8, 2002 Originally posted by Boba Rhett *clenches hands in fists of rage* Saw that coming, miles away!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Nine Posted August 8, 2002 Share Posted August 8, 2002 And I thought that STTCT would be tempremental, not Rhett. You sure you're not preggo, dude? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surfnshannon Posted August 8, 2002 Author Share Posted August 8, 2002 ::::dodges books:::: I'm sorry Rhett!! I guess I just didn't see what everyone else saw!! I just don't understand why there has to be three movies. I feel like its an evil plan to get lots of money! I didn't feel an attachment to any of the charectors. The only one I really admired was Sam. I thought he was going to drown...and I was like....hey now...he was just standing in that water...why is it now 20 feet deep???? The action scenes were pretty good. Props to that. Another thing that I thought was annoying was that one Hobbit brother that kept TOUCHING everything!! Smack him!! The humans kept acting like the Hobbits were little kids. I wanted the main charector to be stronger and I wanted him to yell at them for carrying him around!! Like duh...he can walk! Then...we go through all this long drawn out boring stuff in the beginning and all this talking and the action scenes are cut short!! HELLO??? Right after Gandolph dies they go...no time to cry we gotta go now!!! I was like damn it...give them a moment...! And...one more thing that bugged...I had to turn on the Captions because the voices were soooo low and the music was SO LOUD. I missed half of what they were talking about! I'm reaaaaaaaaaallllllllly sorry to Rhett and the LOTR fans. I just expected more from all the hype. I hope the second movie is much more exciting and the charectors are much more developed so that I care more about them...and can't predict when they are either gonna die or go psycho for the ring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadDoofer Posted August 8, 2002 Share Posted August 8, 2002 I'm sorry Rhett!! I guess I just didn't see what everyone else saw!! I just don't understand why there has to be three movies. I feel like its an evil plan to get lots of money! Think about it, how many people want to see a nine-hour long movie? How many people have time to do that? So they broke it up into segments, just like the book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Nine Posted August 8, 2002 Share Posted August 8, 2002 Hobbits are like little kids, compared to other Middle-Earth races. They live mostly in the Shire and rarely venture out, save for a few towns like Bree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tie Guy Posted August 8, 2002 Share Posted August 8, 2002 Originally posted by Rogue Nine Hobbits are like little kids, compared to other Middle-Earth races. They live mostly in the Shire and rarely venture out, save for a few towns like Bree. But they are adults. Wasn't Frodo like 60 when he left for Bree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryllith Posted August 8, 2002 Share Posted August 8, 2002 Originally posted by Tie Guy But they are adults. Wasn't Frodo like 60 when he left for Bree? They are adults. They just are youthful in their nature, how they see and respond to the world. That's why Gandalf likes them so much. Kryllith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zygomaticus Posted August 8, 2002 Share Posted August 8, 2002 But they are adults. Wasn't Frodo like 60 when he left for Bree? YEAH i think the whole book is messed up with ages. Aragorn is supposed to be aroud 84 in The Return of the King....jeez! He's not even an elf! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boba Rhett Posted August 8, 2002 Share Posted August 8, 2002 Aragorn's peoples lifespans are around 200. Or am I totally messed up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havoc Stryphe Posted August 8, 2002 Share Posted August 8, 2002 Originally posted by Boba Rhett Are am I totally messed up? I don't know about you, but your grammer is! If you are, then I is too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boba Rhett Posted August 8, 2002 Share Posted August 8, 2002 Well at least I can spell grammar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havoc Stryphe Posted August 8, 2002 Share Posted August 8, 2002 DOH!!!!! Oh well, I guess it was more funny than I originally intended! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silenthunter Posted August 8, 2002 Share Posted August 8, 2002 Oh, speaking of, we just bought FotR on video yesterday Hopefully I'll be able to get the DVD sometime... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Nine Posted August 8, 2002 Share Posted August 8, 2002 For an explanation of why Aragorn is so long lived, you'd need to read the Silmarillion. But basically....Aragorn comes from a line of humans that have rather extended lifespans, called the Dúnedain. These are the descendants of the Men of Númenor, who, in the ancient past were pretty long-lived themselves. Don't worry, Tolkien covered everything pretty well. Great explanation, Kryllith. But I just think that Gandalf is a pervy hobbit fancier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Young David Posted August 8, 2002 Share Posted August 8, 2002 Btw ... Don't type Gandolf or Gandolph ... I'ts Gandalf (with the 'a' pronounced as in 'war' and not as in 'ape') (same goes for Dark Vador ... who is he?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 Then...we go through all this long drawn out boring stuff in the beginning and all this talking and the action scenes are cut short!! HELLO??? Right after Gandolph dies they go...no time to cry we gotta go now!!! I was like damn it...give them a moment...! And...one more thing that bugged...I had to turn on the Captions because the voices were soooo low and the music was SO LOUD. I missed half of what they were talking about! Well, if they had just standed there, they would have been shot by orcs. But they are adults. Wasn't Frodo like 60 when he left for Bree? He was fifty, but hobbits live longer than humans, so it's about 30 in normal age. I really admire directors when they keep the movie almost exactly like the original story. I hear LOTR did that and for that I can understand why so many liked it. Wrong, there is great difference between the movie and the book. Even important characters was left out in the film, and a lot of deatails was changed. Still a great film though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfmanNCSU Posted August 14, 2002 Share Posted August 14, 2002 I enjoyed the movie, and I had read the books as well. I thought it was a really good conversion from book to movie, one of the best. Small characters and longer scenes where left off and things were changed to make the movie more dramatic in a sense. And all the main things happened so the story was followed too. Also, in my opinion, the characters in the book were sort of the same way (ho hum) and then they become more enjoyable in the later books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.